Dodge the duck
Re: “Changes in Sunday Comics,” Sunday note to readers.
Well shiver me the woods, one of my most beloved comics, Fillmore Mallard Duck, has been hacked by your staff “in response to reader comments.” Truly? Is your main motto, “Texas’ Leading News Source”, to prevent some of your most sensitive readers from seeing a perspective different from theirs?
The appreciation of political satire is a dying art, at least the conservative style. I am not aware of your readers’ comments, but I only remember three, maybe four, letters expressing their dissatisfaction with the Fillmore Mallard Duck undress. I’ve seen a lot of others urging you to quit Heart of the city, but this tape remains.
I haven’t heard of any concerns about leftist satire (Doonesbury), satire at work (Dilbert) or social satire (Before Christ). I know, considering how much local and international news you post, it might seem comical (pun intended) to spend time giving voice to a comic. However, I appreciate talent and believe Bruce Tinsley and Loren Fishman shape their political views succinctly and humorously.
David B. Robinson, Dallas
Thank you for deleting the Fillmore Mallard Duck Comic. It was high time to move on from this so-called comic book.
Just know that this educated, enlightened, humanist reader wholeheartedly supports your efforts to move us forward rather than glorifying the past and playing on fear and hate.
John E. Hitt, Dallas / Oak Lawn
A bow to cancel the culture
A recent letter suggested that the comic Fillmore Mallard Duck would be more appropriate on the editorial page. Maybe yes, if only to be a counterpoint to the usually bland “Laugh or Cry” feature. I was ready to suggest that Doonesbury should also be repositioned as well. Your editors should also put most of the Associated Press articles they repeat with editorials or editorials, or do a better job of editing. These articles, when covering events related to political controversies, sense the bias in their use of descriptive adjectives, the omission of context, and contested assumptions.
But the total cancellation of Fillmore Mallard Duck is pusillanimous, as advertised as taken in “response to reader comments”. I must have missed the ballot. Nevertheless, to bow to cancel culture is unworthy of The morning news from Dallas, an institution that stood up to the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s. The news long-time publisher George Bannerman Dealey’s insistence that he must “recognize the right of the people to have all important matters from the newspaper on both sides of the paper” risks derision.
Bob Reagan, Dallas East
What about “Doonesbury”?
This letter is not written from a political perspective, but in the interest of fairness and journalistic integrity.
In my youth, I was fascinated by journalism. In fact, I was fortunate enough to write for my hometown every day from my last year of high school until I started college. Before my educational and professional activities finally turned to the business world, I first studied journalism.
One thing I remember from those early experiences was that newspapers had to be impartial, impartial and unbiased.
On the other hand i don’t see how The morning news from Dallas fulfills this duty by canceling Fillmore Mallard Duck and continue to publish Doonesbury (a band you’ve chosen to run for decades).
Really, I’m not a fan of either. What I’m saying is whether you perform them both or neither – to do otherwise seems to demonstrate biased, irresponsible and unprofessional behavior on your part.
Bill Fowler, Frisco
Don’t read this!
Re: “850 Titles for Your Reading List – Lawmakers’ collection of suspicious titles makes them irresistible to kids,” Tuesday Editorials.
Thank you for this strong response to Rep Matt Krause, R-Fort Worth and everyone on the ultra-conservative right – those who believe our lawmakers should decide what children (anyone) should be allowed to read.
Every day, I am amazed at how far Donald Trump loyalists can go further towards fascism and claim to be on the road to restoring democracy. The hypocrisy is laughable, if it wasn’t so completely terrifying.
Your half-joking answer is perfect. I hope those you are speaking to will understand this, although I suspect they usually don’t read newspapers.
Paul Hill, Garland
Not their responsibility
I agree with Governor Greg Abbott: Pornographic literature has no place in school libraries. Before banning the books, Krause and Abbott owe us their definitions of pornography and racial malaise. Since these gentlemen have read these 850 books, surely they can provide a clear and specific justification why each selected book is unacceptable.
Also, aside from causing a little discomfort, why should students their age be prohibited from reading books dealing with true and historically accurate accounts of sexual and racial matters?
In his editorial, The morning news from Dallas suggested that Lonely dove could become a candidate for removal from the library. Therefore, I would suggest that The last picture show and Texasville by Larry McMurtry deserve a closer look. Where does it end?
The selection of book titles should be the sole responsibility of school boards, school administration and parents. Krause’s directive for school districts to report all books on their shelves that contain human sexuality, followed by the blatant book ban, are the first steps towards government control of reading materials.
Robert Tye, Dallas
Click on here send a letter to the editor. Make sure to include the sources.